Ok, so I've been searching the web for a few years for a good 3d game development application. I haven't found much and you all say Jamagic was crap. It seems to me that the competent Clickteam uber-programmers could come up with a 3D game creation system that uses the MMF event style of programming. I know that I would snatch this up in a moment. So, the question is, would you donate toward Clickteam if they used their resources to make MMF3D? And I'm not looking for arguments as to why this is dumb, or why clickteam "sucks". A simple "yes" or "no" will do. If we get enough, maybe I'll pose the question to Clickteam...
This way, you'll likely be able to use an existing "level editor" instead of having to code your own(extremely difficult in some cases). It has this advantage even over the "easy" programming languages like Dark Basic - not to mention that it's not like programming in "Real" C++ since everything is a higher level, all the base code has been defined to you and much of your code will be doing stuff like "if (playerHasCollectedAmmo then Ammo++".
Best idea IMO.
I think a 3D MMF would work. While 3D is more complex some things are slightly easier too.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
That's two for yay, two for nay. Using an already made 3d game engine sounds like just as much work to me, not to mention the fact that it wouldn't seem as unique. I would donate money if they would make it... so that's three. They could do it right and well... I think I'll ask them what they think about it... I think donating toward such an awesome product isn't such a bad idea, provided you have the money. Also, partially just everybody's vote of confidence toward it would encourage alot.
If it was just for 3D games I'd love to try it out but would probably stick with MMF2 as I find 2D so much more interesting. But yes MMF3D - I'd love it and I would donate towards it.
The problem is creating models, animating, and texturing them will be too difficult for most people. It's certainly easier than drawing smooth, detailed sprites like a lot of commercial games have had, but most people tend to go for a simplistic oldschool look(since it's a lot more practical). Someone really needs to release a good, simple 3D animation package. It's possible to do. Some of the old tools for Quake and the like were quite easy to use, but couldn't be use for anything much else.
It reminds me of Duke 3D Build - it had the most intuitive interface ever. It's only now I really realise how amazing it was. I wish they'd make a newer version of build that could do "true" 3D by use of additional layers.
Check out my Telekinesis'em'up Thread and the ALICE Machines -
Well, as in my case, people could have others model for them. And of course there'd be the load of games made with library 3d models that n00bs use until they decide to move on, but I think it'd be good for more skilled users. I've often heard the milkshape is easy to use, and google sketchupis out there for the uber-simple. I would really love MMF3D, but the problem is that by the time it would come out, I'd already be in college for game development the "real" way. (Oh and, I agree somewhat with that 2d is more interesting sentiment.)
For a long time I wanted a 3d mmf. It seems mostly pointless now. It takes a lot more work to get something out of a 3D game than 2D. Just look at where we are with 3D games these days. Anything we could make with mmf3D would look like an N64 game in comparison, or an early dreamcast game at best. Not to mention the extra horsepower you'd need on your computer to run the games.
Then there's the need to be able to do 3D modeling which I've tried and. . . hate. I'd assume that anyone who has made enough progress on 3D modeling would be closer to just coding their game from scratch. You could use sprites, but then you're back to your game looking like it's running on playstation 1. Old style 2D just holds up better than 15 year old 3D. Go look at some of the crappier 3D games from 1995-1998. They don't hold up half as well as early snes and genesis games.
I'd rather put my money towards a superpowerful 2D gamemaking program with some 3D capabilities. Give me full screen zooming and rotation (yoshi's touch and go I think it was called) and a Z axis instead of just layers. Take a look at video editing software to see what I mean by Z axis, it would explode the possibilities of what you can do in mmf.
So, a no for you, JustinC? Gamers that would bother downloading a 3d game likely already have fast enough computers. MMF3D would most assuredly be able to suport more polygons than N64, and even if not, that's fine by me. N64 3D always felt extra cool to me, like it was its own little world.
Hey if I could do N64 or dreamcast type 3D I would totally go for it. I don't think there's a wide enough audience for that product though. Most people these days expect 3D games to look lifelike and require them to buy the latest $300 graphics card. People have a certain expectation for 2D, so if a game looks as good as Super Mario or Sonic they're fine with it. Those expectations are completely different for 3D and most would take one look and say "oh that doesn't look anything like metal gear solid 4". Those games cost millions to make look like that. Same problem happening in the film industry. CG has gotten so good that nobody on a home computer is ever going to be able to impress anyone with their CG work or special fx. We're so used to things being photorealistic that if it looks anything less it looks like crap. Nobody expects 2D to look real, just like nobody expects a 2D animated film to look real.
I just think there's a much bigger audience of people wanting to make a game in the vein of Sonic or mario than Crash Bandicoot. And even if the software could produce results on par with playstation 3 or xbox, how many people could produce work like that? How many games on this site get finished that have crap graphics? Now think how many would get finished when someones saying it'll have 50 miles of new york and graphics better than gears of war.
Most people who download click games are clickers anyway. I think people can have fun with something that's not quite cutting edge; but I see your point. And it's a good one-- but I'd still like the opportunity to try it out for myself.
But they'd get more business from their old ones. What they're doing right now isn't exactly getting loads of new customers. Anyway, Jeff told me it was planned, they just don't know when. I sincerely hope it's soon. PULL OUT YOUR WALLETS, BOYS!
Peblo Custom ratings must be 50 characters or less
Registered 05/07/2002
Points 185
22nd June, 2008 at 20:11:45 -
It's been planned for years though.
"Isn't it always amazing how we characterize a person's intelligence by how closely their thinking matches ours?"
~Belgarath
Yeah I've been hearing about mmf 3D since I got click and create back in like 99. And it would have made a lot more sense back then. Like I said, if it ever happens and it's good I'll get it.
A MMF3D is probably simple to design. Just add like one demension Z. A way you could like scroll the screen easyly in the level editor. set some camera stuff and make a 3D animation editor is all I can think of. I think If you donate you should get a discount off any Product by how much you donated. I would donate If I wasn't saving up my money on a PS3.
All your base are in another castle, take this.
Peblo Custom ratings must be 50 characters or less
Registered 05/07/2002
Points 185
22nd June, 2008 at 22:03:06 -
That's fake 3D and MMF can already do that.
"Isn't it always amazing how we characterize a person's intelligence by how closely their thinking matches ours?"
~Belgarath
I think a N64 style 3D game would be alright. Doesn't matter much about downloads as long as you're happy with what you've made... I just want to go to my friends and say "hay gise check out this awesome gayum I made. It's 3D!!".
Discarded pizza boxes are an indispensable source of cheese.
An included simple model editor would be cool... with the option of drawing textures straight on the model. But That's just wishful thinking. It seems that making MMF3D wouldn't be too hard, and this is coming from someone ho knows enough to say this. Even though I can't exactly program 3d games doesn't mean I don't know what goes into that kind of stuff... I mean, it would be hard, but compared to making ANY game creation system, it doesn't seem like such a big jump.
Ok everybody. (Sorry for the double post.) Jeff says unless a big publisher/developer gives them enough money to hire more full-time developers, MMF3D will have to be after MMF3 and the Bluray project.
I haven't seen yet a free 3D game maker that's done well. And I'm pretty sure that MMF would have a lot more trouble pulling it off than those other people who were doing it for years. 3D is also a lot more trouble than 2D in the short term - MMF would have a better customer base if they just kept improving the 2D version, especially the interface. They need to go back to basics and try to get an interface that's very friendly, very quick to use, as well as letting the event editor support heavy-duty code so we wouldn't need Dines' E++
But unless MMF come with something with the ease of use of Anime Studio or such, I think MMF3D be a long shot. Even if so, they'd be better off trying to recode KNP into a 3D version.
I think, if any, Construct will end up going 3D earlier. They have much better usage of HWA than MMF and they could make the transition a lot earlier.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
I have to say, "easy" 3D development tools are just about impossible. Opening that up to people would just result in a bunch of n00bs crying over the fact they have to model, texture and map all their objects.
3D and MMF coming together is something I've always been against, get 2D perfect first at least then consider it - maybe. If I was ever going to delve into 3D it would be off of an existing game engine or just something like Ogre3D and actual code, because there are so many more aspects to 3D that an easy tool wouldn't be easy.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Using an already made 3d game engine sounds like just as much work to me, not to mention the fact that it wouldn't seem as unique. I would donate money if they would make it... so that's three. 
They could do it right and well... I think I'll ask them what they think about it... I think donating toward such an awesome product isn't such a bad idea, provided you have the money. Also, partially just everybody's vote of confidence toward it would encourage alot.
And of course there'd be the load of games made with library 3d models that n00bs use until they decide to move on, but I think it'd be good for more skilled users. I've often heard the milkshape is easy to use, and google sketchupis out there for the uber-simple. I would really love MMF3D, but the problem is that by the time it would come out, I'd already be in college for game development the "real" way. (Oh and, I agree somewhat with that 2d is more interesting sentiment.)
Gamers that would bother downloading a 3d game likely already have fast enough computers. MMF3D would most assuredly be able to suport more polygons than N64, and even if not, that's fine by me. N64 3D always felt extra cool to me, like it was its own little world.
